A day after 12 former senior intelligence officials signed a letter condemning President Trump for revoking the security clearance of former CIA director John Brennan, 60 lower-ranking former CIA officers signed an open letter on Friday also in opposition to Mr. Trump's decision.

"All of us believe it is critical to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure. But we believe equally strongly that former government officials have the right to express their unclassified views on what they see as critical national security issues without fear of being punished for doing so," the new letter says.

The letter supports Brennan's right to express his opinions, without necessarily approving of his perspective.

"Our signatures below do not necessarily mean that we concur with the opinions expressed by former Director Brennan or the way in which he expressed them," it says. "What they do represent, however, is our firm belief that the country will be weakened if there is a political litmus test applied before seasoned experts are allowed to share their views."

The signatories of the letter include outspoken former officers including Nada Bakos, David Priess, and John Sipher, who have criticized Mr. Trump.

The first letter, which was initially signed by 12 former senior intelligence officials from each administration going back to Ronald Reagan's presidency, added three signatories since it was first published Thursday. Former CIA Director Robert Gates' name was added to the list shortly after it was published. On Friday, former Director of National Intelligence Denny Blair, who briefly served as Obama's first DNI, and former deputy CIA director Porter Goss, signed the letter.

The first letter's other signees include former Directors of Central Intelligence Robert Gates, William Webster, George Tenet and Porter Goss; former CIA Directors Gen. Michael Hayden, Leon Panetta and Gen. David Petraeus; former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper; and former deputy CIA directors John McLaughlin, Stephen Kappes, Avril Haines, David Cohen and Michael Morell, who is also a CBS News senior national security contributor.

_________________Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.

Last edited by Fintan on Wed Sep 12, 2018 4:36 pm; edited 7 times in total

Joined: 22 Sep 2006Posts: 850Location: Lost in anamnesis, cannot forget my way out

Posted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 9:13 pm Post subject:

Nice overview. Interesting times!

With revocation on clearances Trump is threatening to toss a wrench into this revolving door Operation Mockingbird in-plain-sight that has been going on. It PAINS me to think that just a couple of generations ago these kinds of alliances were considered unholy to the point of scandal! But due to the naive (okay you can also say 'open minded') disinterest of younger generations... and a bit of what I call circular authoritarianism, where viewers are treated to an absurd 'expert loop',

"Critics challenge CNN, is it proper that retired intelligence personnel possessed of high clearances consult regularly on news programs and even align themselves politically while implying that they are still receiving regular information, perhaps even orders, from deep within the government...? To help answer your questions, we're talking with a retired intelligence analyst on our payroll..."

And people don't bat an eye as the foxes hold press conferences from the henhouse.

The Alex Jones purge is a pretty pickle. Despite occasional meltdowns he's managed to follow current events pretty well lately, and by Fintan's First Law of Jones, Alex is knowing CIA asset. Which means the controlled demolition of Jones might have been in the cards or a mishap of anti-Trump crossfire too. If planned, like those proverbial folk who sold their souls to the devil, did AJ know when the jig would be up? And to what extent has he been set up?

You have kooky-spooks like Steve Pieczenik planting poison pills like this one (index to 10:15) on INFOWARS. Pieczenik may as well be QANON for all I care, he does have the psych background and bullshit blaster for it, he's the perfect confidential source to snake his way in the back door to become everyone's favorite 'expert' in a world of the naive.

___
Q: Why is a raven like a writing-desk?
A: Enquiries have been so often addressed to me, as to whether any answer to the Hatter's riddle can be imagined, that I may as well put on record here what seems to be a fairly appropriate answer, viz: 'Because it can produce few notes, tho they are very flat; and it is never put with the wrong end in front!' This, however, is merely an afterthought; the Riddle, as originally invented, had no answer at all.
~Lewis Carroll (or was it Dr. Steve Pieczenik?)

Michael Caputo says Cohen is telling porky pies
just to get leniency in his criminal investigation.

From 2001 to 2005 there was an ongoing investigation into the Clinton Foundation.
A Grand Jury had been impanelled.
Governments from around the world had donated to the “Charity”.
Yet, from 2001 to 2003 none of those “Donations” to the Clinton Foundation were declared. Now you would think that an honest investigator would be able to figure this out.
Look who took over this investigation in 2005: None other than James Comey; Coincidence? Guess who was transferred into the Internal Revenue Service to run the Tax Exemption Branch of the IRS? None other than, Lois “Be on The Look Out” (BOLO) Lerner. Isn’t that interesting?
But this is all just a series of strange coincidences, right?
Guess who ran the Tax Division inside the Department of Injustice from 2001 to 2005?
No other than the Assistant Attorney General of the United States,
Rod Rosenstein.
Guess who was the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation during this time frame?
Another coincidence (just an anomaly in statistics and chances), but it was Robert Mueller.
What do all four casting characters have in common?
They all were briefed and/or were front-line investigators into the Clinton Foundation Investigation.
Another coincidence, right?
Fast forward to 2009....
James Comey leaves the Justice Department to go and cash-in at Lockheed Martin.
Hillary Clinton is running the State Department, official government business, on her own personal email server.
The Uranium One “issue” comes to the attention of the Hillary.
Like all good public servants do, supposedly looking out for America’s best interest, she decides to support the decision and approve the sale of 20% of US Uranium to no other than, the Russians.
Now you would think that this is a fairly straight up deal, except it wasn’t, America got absolutely nothing out of it.
However, prior to the sales approval, no other than Bill Clinton goes to Moscow, gets paid 500K for a one hour speech; then meets with Vladimir Putin at his home for a few hours.
Ok, no big deal right? Well, not so fast, the FBI had a mole inside the money laundering and bribery scheme.
Robert Mueller was the FBI Director during this time frame? Yep, He even delivered a Uranium Sample to Moscow in 2009.
Who was handling that case within the Justice Department out of the US Attorney’s Office in Maryland?
None other than, Rod Rosenstein. And what happened to the informant?
The Department of Justice placed a GAG order on him and threatened to lock him up if he spoke out about it.
How does 20% of the most strategic asset of the United States of America end up in Russian hands when the FBI has an informant, a mole providing inside information to the FBI on the criminal enterprise?
Very soon after; the sale was approved!~145 million dollars in “donations” made their way into the Clinton Foundation from entities directly connected to the Uranium One deal.
Guess who was still at the Internal Revenue Service working the Charitable Division? None other than, - Lois Lerner.
Ok, that’s all just another series of coincidences, nothing to see here, right?
Let’s fast forward to 2015.
Due to a series of tragic events in Benghazi and after the 9 “investigations” the House, Senate and at State Department, Trey Gowdy who was running the 10th investigation as Chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi discovers that the Hillary ran the State Department on an unclassified, unauthorized, outlaw personal email server.He also discovered that none of those emails had been turned over when she departed her “Public Service” as Secretary of State which was required by law. He also discovered that there was Top Secret information contained within her personally archived email.
Sparing you the State Departments cover up, the nostrums they floated, the delay tactics that were employed and the outright lies that were spewed forth from the necks of the Kerry State Department, we shall leave it with this…… they did everything humanly possible to cover for Hillary. .
Now this is amazing, guess who became FBI Director in 2013? None other than James Comey; who secured 17 no bid contracts for his employer (Lockheed Martin) with the State Department and was rewarded with a six million dollar thank you present when he departed his employer? Amazing how all those no-bids just went right through at State, huh?
Now he is the FBI Director in charge of the “Clinton Email Investigation” after of course his FBI Investigates the Lois Lerner “Matter” at the Internal Revenue Service and he exonerates her. Nope.... couldn’t find any crimes there.
In April 2016, James Comey drafts an exoneration letter of Hillary Rodham Clinton, meanwhile the DOJ is handing out immunity deals like candy.They didn’t even convene a Grand Jury!
Like a lightning bolt of statistical impossibility, like a miracle from God himself, like the true “Gangsta” Comey is, James steps out into the cameras of an awaiting press conference on July the 8th of 2016, and exonerates the Hillary from any wrongdoing.
Do you see the pattern?
It goes on and on, Rosenstein becomes Asst. Attorney General,Comey gets fired based upon a letter by Rosenstein, Comey leaks government information to the press, Mueller is assigned to the Russian Investigation sham by Rosenstein to provide cover for decades of malfeasance within the FBI and DOJ and the story continues.
FISA Abuse, political espionage..... pick a crime, any crime, chances are...... this group and a few others did it:
All the same players.
All compromised and conflicted.
All working fervently to NOT go to jail themselves
All connected in one way or another to the Clinton's.
They are like battery acid; they corrode and corrupt everything they touch.How many lives have these two destroyed?
As of this writing, the Clinton Foundation, in its 20+ years of operation of being the largest International Charity Fraud in the history of mankind, has never been audited by the Internal Revenue Service.
Let us not forget that Comey's brother works for DLA Piper, the law firm that does the Clinton Foundation's taxes.
The person that is the common denominator to all the crimes above and still doing her evil escape legal maneuvers at the top of the 3 Letter USA Agencies?
Yep, that would be Hillary R. Clinton.
Now who is LISA BARSOOMIAN? Let’s learn a little about Mrs. Lisa H. Barsoomian’s background.
Lisa H. Barsoomian, an Attorney that graduated from Georgetown Law, is a protégé of James Comey and Robert Mueller.
Barsoomian, with her boss R. Craig Lawrence, represented Bill Clinton in 1998.
Lawrence also represented:
Robert Mueller three times;
James Comey five times;
Barack Obama 45 times;
Kathleen Sebelius 56 times;
Bill Clinton 40 times; and
Hillary Clinton 17 times.
Between 1998 and 2017, Barsoomian herself represented the FBI at least five times.
You may be saying to yourself, OK, who cares? Who cares about the work history of this Barsoomian woman?
Apparently, someone does, because someone out there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets (?). Someone out there cares so much that even the internet has been “purged” of all information pertaining to Barsoomian.
Historically, this indicates that the individual is a protected CIA operative. Additionally, Lisa Barsoomian has specialized in opposing Freedom of Information Act requests on behalf of the intelligence community. Although Barsoomian has been involved in hundreds of cases representing the DC Office of the US Attorney, her email address is Lisa Barsoomian at NIH.gov. The NIH stands for National Institutes of Health. This is a tactic routinely used by the CIA to protect an operative by using another government organization to shield their activities.
It’s a cover, so big deal right? What does one more attorney with ties to the US intelligence community really matter?
It deals with Trump and his recent tariffs on Chinese steel and aluminum imports, the border wall, DACA, everything coming out of California, the Uni-party unrelenting opposition to President Trump, the Clapper leaks, the Comey leaks, Attorney General Jeff Sessions recusal and subsequent 14 month nap with occasional forays into the marijuana legalization mix …. and last but not least Mueller’s never-ending investigation into collusion between the Trump team and-the Russians.
Why does Barsoomian, CIA operative, merit any mention?
BECAUSE….
She is Assistant Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s WIFE!

_________________Minds are like parachutes.
They only function when open.

Nicely wrapped up Fintan! Amazing what goes on in Gov's around the globe. What a scam Democracy is allowed to be._________________"Now water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend." - Bruce Lee
"Three things cannot be long hidden: the sun, the moon, and the truth." - Buddha

What I don't understand is why trump doesn't push on the fisa warrant dossier thing?.

Do you think he has an ace up his sleeve?. Maybe he feels (knows) he doesn't need it...yet.

Fintan wrote:

Apparently, someone does, because someone out there cares so much that they’ve “purged” all Barsoomian court documents for her Clinton representation in Hamburg vs. Clinton in 1998 and its appeal in 1999 from the DC District and Appeals Court dockets (?).![/list]

Funny thing,

When I searched Hamburg Vs Clinton the Snopes fact check site popped up.

Nobody has “purged all Barsoomian court documents” relating to her role in the 1998 case Hamburg vs. Clinton. This is false. It took us only a few minutes to find that case on a court records database and locate a document written and signed by Barsoomian.

Well although I think Snopes is bullshit I wanted to find the files on a database, and I gave up coz I couldn't find shit.

I wanted to verify the claim either way in hope not to peddle run of the mill conspiracy. If anyone else wants to try these databases crack on, but looks like they have indeed been 'purged'.

:Edit:

Well there's some strange shit going on about Barsoomian, and Clinton. I came across a 'fact' site that said,

Rod Rosenstein and Lisa Barsoomian are, in fact, married. But Barsoomian has never served as a personal attorney to the Clintons.

I wonder what Snopes would say about that seeing as they took 4 minutes to confirm the records were there ie Barsoomian worked for Clinton.

There's more out there with some searches coming up saying she didn't represent Clinton at all, and it's a rumour started by Roger stone who was an advisor to trump....WTF.

There's definitely an effort there to muddy the waters, and hide the fact she did represent Clinton.

Perhaps I am missing something and no disrespect to Fintan's analyses, but so far in Trump's presidency I don't see much, if any, real difference from the s.o.s. of BushClintonBushObama. Maybe he has a plan that is slowly evolving.
I'm waiting.

Perhaps I am missing something and no disrespect to Fintan's analyses, but so far in Trump's presidency I don't see much, if any, real difference from the s.o.s. of BushClintonBushObama. Maybe he has a plan that is slowly evolving.
I'm waiting.

I used to think the same, and still question it, but here's my take,

People would say well he's the lesser of two evils, and it's better than Clinton being in power. I would answer that's a pathetic reason for giving trump any validation, but the reasons go much deeper than that when you weigh all in.

Most importantly the Washington elites who have creamed over the like of the Bush family, the Clinton's, and Obama hate him. Trump has put a stop to that privileged line of elites who always expected, and thought it their right to be at the top.

Those to me are very good reasons to although not support him, but at least recognise the boat he's rocked. You don't even have to go along with his policies to see him being President is a massive game changer, and nothing will ever be the same again. Even if he was to lose the next election you have 60 million US citizen's who have had enough of the elites running the show.

Trump isn't perfect, but isn't that what we want?...it's a start at least.

THAT'S A NOTORIOUS CIA RAG, SO DON'T EXPECT THE
FULL TRUTH BUT SEE HOW MUCH TRUTH HAS ALREADY
BECOME UNDENIABLE AND MADE IT INTO THIS ARTICLE.

Quote:

The September 11 memorial in lower Manhattan.

CIA AND SAUDI ARABIA CONSPIRED
TO KEEP 9/11 DETAILS SECRET,
NEW BOOK SAYS

BY JEFF STEIN ON 8/28/18 AT 6:00 AM

It’s easier to bury uncomfortable facts than to confront them. So this September 11, the ceremonies marking the 2001 attacks on New York and Washington, D.C., will simply honor the dead.

In Manhattan, tourists and mourners will gather where the World Trade Center Towers once stood, lowering their heads in memory of the 2,606 who perished there. The services won't reflect the view that the attacks might well have been prevented.

But for hundreds of families and a growing number of former FBI agents, the grief of another 9/11 ceremony will be laced with barely muted rage: There remains a conspiracy of silence among high former U.S. and Saudi officials about the attacks.

“It’s horrible. We still don’t know what happened,” said Ali Soufan, one of the lead FBI counterterrorism agents whom the CIA kept in the dark about the movements of the future Al-Qaeda hijackers. To Soufan and many other former national security officials, the unanswered questions about the events leading up to the September 11, 2001, attacks dwarf those about the assassination of John F. Kennedy, because “9/11 changed the whole world.” It not only led to the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the fracturing of the Middle East and the global growth of Islamic militantism but also pushed the U.S. closer to being a virtual homeland-security police state.

“I am sad and depressed about it,” said Mark Rossini, one of two FBI agents assigned to the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit, who says agency managers mysteriously blocked them from informing their headquarters about future Al-Qaeda plotters present in the United States in 2000 and again in the summer of 2001. “It is patently evident the attacks did not need to happen and there has been no justice,” he said.

The authors of a new book on 9/11 hope to refocus public attention on the cover-up. Thoroughly mining the multiple official investigations into the event, John Duffy and Ray Nowosielski find huge holes and contradictions in the official story that 9/11 was merely “a failure to connect the dots.”

Duffy, a left-leaning writer and environmental activist, and Nowosielski, a documentary filmmaker, have nowhere near the prominence of other journalists who have poked holes in the official story, in particular Lawrence Wright, author of The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11, the Pulitzer Prize–winning book that was turned into a gripping multi-part docudrama on Hulu earlier this year.

But Duffy and Nowosielski come to the story with a noteworthy credential: In 2009 they scored an astounding video interview with Richard Clarke, a White House counterterrorism adviser during the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations. In it, Clarke raged that top CIA officials, including director George Tenet, had withheld crucial information from him about Al-Qaeda’s plotting and movements, including the arrival in the U.S. of future hijackers Khalid al-Mihdhar and Nawaf al-Hazmi. In The Watchdogs Didn’t Bark: The CIA, NSA, and the Crimes of the War on Terror, the authors assemble a compelling case of a government-wide cover-up of Saudi complicity in the affair.

In 2002, Tenet swore to Congress that he wasn’t aware of the imminent threat because it came in a cable that wasn’t marked urgent—and “no one read it.” But his story was shredded five years later when Senators Ron Wyden and Kit Bond forced loose an executive summary of the CIA’s own internal investigation of 9/11, which stated that “some 50 to 60 individuals read one or more of the six Agency cables containing travel information related to these terrorists.”

Clarke went ballistic. Until then, he had trusted Tenet, a close colleague and friend, to tell the truth. In 2009, despairing at the lack of media traction on the astounding disclosure, he wrote a book about the duplicity, Your Government Failed You, which was largely ignored. So when Duffy and Nowosielski came calling, he welcomed them.

“I believed, for the longest time, that this was one or two low-level desk officers who got this [information about Hazmi and Mihdhar] and somehow didn’t realize the significance,” he told them. But “50—five oh—50 CIA officers knew this, and they included [Tenet and] all kinds of people who were regularly talking to me? Saying I’m pissed doesn’t begin to describe it.”

All these years later, it’s still unclear why the CIA would keep such crucial details about Al-Qaeda movements from the FBI. Clarke and other insiders suspect that the spy agency had a deeply compartmented plan in the works to recruit Hazmi, Mihdhar and perhaps other Al-Qaeda operatives as double agents. If the FBI discovered they were in California, the theory goes, it would have demanded their arrest. When the CIA’s recruitment ploy fizzled, Tenet and company hid the details from Clarke lest they be accused of “malfeasance and misfeasance,” he said.

It’s the only logical explanation for why the presence of Hazmi and Mihdhar was kept from him until after the attacks, Clarke said. “They told us everything—except this,” he says in the video.

Tenet and two of his counterterrorism deputies, Rich Blee and Cofer Black, issued a statement calling Clarke’s theory “reckless and profoundly wrong.” But now Clarke has company. Duffy and Nowosielski found other key former FBI counterterrorism agents and officials who have developed deep doubts about Tenet’s story. The only element they disagree on is which officials were responsible for the alleged subterfuge.

“I think if there were some conscious effort” not to tell the bureau what was going on, Dale Watson, a former FBI deputy chief of counterterrorism told them, “it was probably” carried out below Tenet, Blee and Black, by managers of the CIA’s Osama bin Laden unit.

But Pat D’Amuro, an even more senior former FBI counterterrorism official, told them, “There’s no doubt in my mind that [withholding the information] went up further in the agency” than those managers. “And why they didn’t send it over, to this day, I don’t know why.”

And then there’s the continuing mystery of Saudi complicity with the hijackers. Duffy and Nowosielski offer a tightly focused update on what’s been learned about Saudi support for Al-Qaeda in recent years. Back in 2004, the official 9/11 Commission said it found no evidence that the “Saudi government as an institution, or senior Saudi officials individually funded” Al-Qaeda.

A year later, the highly redacted CIA inspector general’s report cracked open another window, saying that some agency officers had “speculated” that “dissident sympathizers within the government” (i.e., religious extremists) may have supported bin Laden. Subsequent investigations have revealed that officials from the kingdom’s Islamic affairs ministry were actively helping the hijackers get settled in California.

Such information spurred several hundred families of the 9/11 attack victims to file suit against the Saudi government in federal court in New York last year, seeking unspecified monetary damages.

“Saudi intelligence has admitted that they knew who these two guys were,” Andrew Maloney, an attorney for families, told Newsweek last week. “They knew they were Al-Qaeda the day they arrived in Los Angeles. So any notion from the Saudi government saying, ‘Oh, we just help out all Saudis here’ is false. They knew. And the CIA knew.”

The kingdom has turned over some 6,800 pages of documents, “mostly in Arabic,” that Maloney’s team is in the process of translating. “There’s some interesting things in there,” he said, “and some clear gaps.” He said he’ll return to court in October to press for more documents.

He also wants to depose Saudi officials, particularly Fahad al-Thumairy, a former Los Angeles consular official and imam of a Culver City, California, mosque attended by the hijackers. In 2003, Thumairy was intercepted after he landed in Los Angeles on a flight from Germany and deported from the U.S. “because of suspected terrorist links.” But he still works for the government in Riyadh, Maloney said. “Can you believe that?”

In April, Maloney subpoenaed the FBI for documents on Thumairy and Omar al-Bayoumi, a suspected Saudi spy in the U.S. who was also in contact with the hijackers. The bureau has not responded, so on September 11 he plans to file “a formal motion to compel the FBI” to produce the documents. His motion follows a sworn statement by Steven Moore, the FBI agent who headed the bureau’s investigation into the hijacking of the plane that flew into the Pentagon, charging the 9/11 Commission with misleading the public when it said it “had not found evidence” of Saudi assistance to Hazmi and Mihdhar.

“There was clearly evidence that Thumairy provided assistance to Hazmi and Mihdhar,” Moore wrote. And “based on the proof in our investigation,” he added, “Bayoumi himself was a clandestine agent and associated with radical extremists, including Thumairy.”

Moore’s statement was first reported by the Florida Bulldog, a Fort Lauderdale news site that has been investigating the hijackers’ contacts with flight schools. “To my knowledge,” Moore stated, “Thumairy has never been the subject of a genuine law enforcement interview conducted by the actual agents who investigated him.”

Maloney’s additional targets are other FBI, CIA, State Department and Treasury Department personnel and documents. “There are a lot of people, former agents—I won't identify who or what agencies—who have talked to us,” he said, but others, especially in the CIA’s bin Laden unit, “will never talk to us or will only talk to us if they are given some kind of blanket immunity.”

Getting access to them, he said, would probably require an executive order from President Donald Trump—an unlikely outcome given his administration’s strong backing for the Saudi monarchy.

There may be public support for Maloney’s endeavors. A 2016 poll found a slight majority of Americans (54.3 percent) believe that the government is hiding something about the 9/11 attacks. Then again, a considerable number of 9/11 "truthers" embrace conspiracy theories positing that the attacks were “an inside job” by the Bush administration and/or Israel and abetted by explosives planted in one of the World Trade Center towers.

But they are right about Saudi resistance to fully disclosing its relations with the hijackers. Last year, agents of the monarchy were discovered surreptitiously funding a PR effort to derail a congressional bill permitting a 9/11 families group to sue the kingdom for damages. Last September, the family group filed a 17-page complaint with the Justice Department.

Terry Strada, a leader of the group 9/11 Families & Survivors United for Justice Against Terrorism, will mourn again this year, but not at the site where the towers once stood and her husband died. She plans to attend “a private service” at the Shrine of St. Joseph in Stirling, New Jersey, which she said has “a beautiful and solemn space” dedicated to all who died in the 9/11 attacks.

But she is also full of fury at the government’s refusal to release all it knows about the run-up to the attacks. “It’s very sad that we’re still being kept in the dark about it. It’s frustrating. It angers me,” she told Newsweek. “It’s a slap in the face. They think they’re above the law and don’t have to respond to the families—and the world. It’s disgusting.”

But Strada evinces even more disdain for the Saudis. Responding to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s August 20 message “wishing Muslims around the world a blessed Eid al-Adha,” she tweeted, “Seriously???”

Jamal Khashoggi:
Where The Road to Damascus & The Path to 9/11 Converge

George Washington Wed, 10/17/2018 - 11:02

By Kristen Breitweiserone of the four 9/11 widows – known as the “Jersey Girls” – instrumental in forcing the government to form the 9/11 Commission to investigate the 2001 attacks. Follow Kristen Breitweiser on Twitter: http://twitter.com/kdbreitweiser.

[ E X T R A C T ]

Jamal Khashoggi was no Mother Theresa.

First, let me be crystal clear. Jamal Khashoggi was not merely a journalist working for the Washington Post.

Additionally, Jamal Khashoggi was not just an outspoken critic of current Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman.

To start, a person should read the Chicago Tribune article from 2004 that talks about Jamal Khashoggi being recruited by Adel Batterjee http://historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=adel_abdul_jalil_batterjee in the 1980’s to get the “scoop of a lifetime.” That assignment was to go with Batterjee to Afghanistan and hang-out with the CIA/Saudi mujahideen fighting against the Soviets. The article is long and very well-researched. I highly suggest you take the time to read it because it details very clearly and specifically why and how Jamal Khashoggi knew so much about al Qaeda, the CIA, the Saudis, and much of the financing, funding, and organizing of Bin Laden that led to the 9/11 attacks.http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-0402220496feb22-story.html

Also, please note that in one of the leading books written about the 9/11 attacks, Lawrence Wright’s, “The Looming Tower,” Jamal Khashoggi is portrayed by Wright as a “friend” of Bin Laden. Khashoggi is not a “journalist” who reports on bin Laden. Rather he is described as Osama Bin Laden’s friend. And the Bin Laden/Khashoggi friendship apparently spans more than a decade—from Afghanistan, to Pakistan, to the Sudan.

In addition, also note that Jamal Khashoggi was closely connected to Prince Turki al Faisal. Prince Turki was the head of Saudi intelligence for more than 20 years. Interestingly, he resigned from his post 10 days before 9/11. Probably more interestingly, Turki is the man who allegedly brokered the deal with Bin Laden back in 1998 where, in exchange for money and support, Bin Laden would not attack the Saudi Royal Family. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/563318/posts Some believe that this agreement paved the way for the 9/11 attacks and various intelligence agencies around the globe “looking the other way” or “turning a blind eye” to al Qaeda’s actions in the lead up to 9/11. http://historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=turki_bin_faisal_bin_abdul_aziz_al_saud Notably, Prince Turki al Faisal was also one of the first named defendants in the 9/11 Families’ litigation. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/02/september11.politics He was dismissed from the case years ago due to grounds of sovereign immunity.

Just because Jamal Khashoggi was around during the original days of al Qaeda’s creation, knew how all the Islamic charities were set up and how al Qaeda funds moved around the world, was a friend of Bin Laden’s for at least two decades, was very connected to Saudi intelligence and quite possibly, (like his Uncle Adnan) worked with the CIA, it doesn’t necessarily mean that Jamal Khashoggi was a bad actor.

But, I’m someone who believes that you judge a man’s character by the company he keeps which is why I find the current uproar over what happened to Jamal so curious.

One last fact to mention: the timing of Khashoggi’s disappearance when taken in connection with the 9/11 Families’ litigation.

Last Friday, something very notable happened in the 9/11 litigation against the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. For the first time ever, the Department of Justice stood on the side of the 9/11 Families and publicly committed to finally releasing three large tranches of formerly secret documents that we believe connect the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to the 9/11 attacks. This is the biggest development we have had in our over 16 years of litigation.

In a time when news lasts about as long as a minute, why has the story of Jamal Khashoggi dominated headlines for more than a week? Was Jamal Khashoggi ever questioned by the FBI at any time before or after the 9/11 attacks? If not, why not? Was Jamal Khashoggi ever employed by the CIA? Was Jamal Khashoggi ever deemed an asset of the CIA? When did Jamal’s employment for Saudi intelligence come to an end? Was Jamal Khashoggi a joint asset between the GIA and the CIA?

Did Jamal Khashoggi ever have any contact with the 9/11 hijackers or anyone in the support network of the 9/11 hijackers inside the United States? And, why did it take 15 Saudi assassins to kill Jamal Khashoggi? Doesn’t that seem a bit like overkill? And, is it just a coincidence that there were 15 Saudi hijackers on 9/11?

Why would Jamal Khashoggi willingly go to the Saudi Consulate in Turkey—especially given his alleged sour relationship with Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman? What would inspire him to go there? And what was the entreaty MBS allegedly made to Jamal more than one month ago about anyways? Was it made in earnest? What was Jamal Khashoggi really doing at the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul?